1 Comments:

GNGarcia said...

Small schools might be a response to poorly performing schools at any level. The research base, however, does not categorically support the notion for a number of reasons. The first is that most research on the topic has been plagued with design problems, including the fact that researchers have asked the wrong questions.

A more promising alternative might be to phase in small schools-within-schools and compare the results. But, that doesn't mean that the mega-schools shouldn't be subject to infusions of change and talent. It simply means that large city schools need to plan and experiment accordingly to carefully learn what's working. That way, changes remain unique to the community and its resources. The not too distant decision to reduce K+ class sizes resulted in lost time and the lack of delivery of sound services to many very young children because it was not planned well nor were the probable obstacles carefully thought out. For example, were there enough well-trained and certified teachers to fill each new classroom?

The new Mayor might consider staying on top of the Superintendent's Reform Plan and ask about the evidence that supports everything the Plan dictates.